The principle in law that one is innocent until proven guilty has created much discourse. There are those who feel that the moment that one is arrested, there is reasonable belief that they committed the crime. However, there are those who feel that just as the principle states, one is, and should be taken as a victim and the outcome could be either way: guilty or not guilty. In fact, this argument is supported by the many cases of malicious prosecutions and mistaken identities.
This research paper will discuss why there is no value to the just deserts approach and why, if supplemented with a re-entry program, just deserts will have a greater significance. The theory and practice of the just deserts approach will be examined as well as why it does not appear to be working for offenders. Additionally, re-entry programs will be analyzed; those operating in Canada and in the United States, to further explain why reintegrating is better for the community and offenders. It is easy to agree with the just deserts approach to crime, however, when a loved one is affected by the harsh punishments and the negative consequences of prison, it makes life afterward extremely
There are a couple of main routes or options that exist when handling domestic violence cases under this policy. An initial complaint or registration with the law must be made in order to confirm that a domestic violence incident has occurred in the first place, like any other crime. This being said, there must be some report of violence to a degree that threatens the safety and well being of the victim in order for a formal charge to be brought in front of the courts. Once an aggressor enters the legal system and prosecutors become involved, a no-drop policy ensures that a verdict will be reached regarding that aggressor’s behavior. The victim is not required to testify, except in some cases, or provide any further information in order for prosecution to continue.
Ethical standards are rules or legal guidelines that regulates the behaviors of those that work within the criminal justice system. Ethical issues in criminal justice creates resolutions to the issues professionals may encounter and on how they may use their authority. Ethical laws and rules are in place to solve the problems with individuals who may misuse their authority for personal gain and holds them accountable for their actions. Many individuals within the criminal justice system face ethical problems involving their principles.
In addition, this strong evidence should lead to greater formal charges in adult courts rather than juvenile courts. Adult courts offer better protection to the society and moreover, juvenile serious offenders are held accountable and responsible for their actions. Additionally, they argue that, if serious juvenile offenders with criminal history are sentenced there is the likelihood they will be a social
While we have a justice system that is based off laws and cases that come before, and there are also some cases that express the moral principles found in our societies for a case by case assesment. The idea that anyone who commits a crime, but is missing the ability to defer right from wrong shouldn’t be held to the same standards as someone who has a rational mind. For example, in “The Insanity Defense” the narrator talks about if a person is convicted of a crime, the prosecutor must prove two things; that the person engaged in a guilty act and that he or she had guilty intend. “But what about situations in which the person commits the act and intends to do so, but was suffering from a mental condition that impairs their ability to appreciate
If a witness becomes more confident in their recollection of the perpetrators features after a length of time, this could be a form of confirmation bias: a way to put the traumatic case behind them. It is easier psychologically to identify a suspect and obtain closure than it is to live knowing that your attacker could still be out there. To combat this, it is suggested that the victim be questioned immediately after the incident to prevent memory deterioration, and with open ended questions to allow for free recall so as to obtain as much information as possible; even a cognitive interview would be
Introduction This question requires for an understanding on the rules and principles relating to criminal liability for an omission. As well as whether the rules and principles are too restrictive on individual freedom. In order to have an understanding of the rules and principles of omissions, one first must understand how criminal liability is imposed. For a person to be found guilty of a crime they must have both the mens rea and actus reus of the committed crime.
Criminal law covers the area of crimes and is there to maintain law and order. A crime refers to a breach of one or more rule of law. The society believes that individuals should be held responsible for their actions, especially when those actions constitutes a crime that would endanger the safety of today’s society. In the eye of the law, in order to paint an individual as guilty, the prosecution must prove that the defendant committed an actus reus had mens rea at the same time. Actus reus refers to a guilty act and mens rea means a guilty state of mind.
Introduction Criminal law is the branch of the national law that defines certain forms of human conduct as crimes and provides for the punishment of those persons with criminal capacity who unlawfully and with a guilty mind commit crimes. For conduct to have taken place there had to have been a positive act or an omission (failure to do something). There is no general duty for an individual to act, but depending on the legal convictions of the community, there may be criminal liability for a failure to act. In determining to which extent criminal law should reflect the values and general agreement of the community we bring rise to various policy considerations, the relevance of the Bill of Rights and its effect on our Constitution.
The question is to research the Megan Law based on the ideal characteristics of criminal law. Is Megan Law a good law? In my opinion, no law is perfect, but our laws are made to protect the people, for instance, politicality is the infringement of our state rules and is considered a good law. This law makes it mandatory in almost every state that sex offenders register. The law of specificity provides a strict definition of certain acts.
Theories help answer two very important questions; how and why. The purpose of a theory is to explain how and why certain things and/or events are connected to other things and/or events. Everything done in the criminal justice field is based on theory. In criminology, theories answer questions about criminal behavior that would have otherwise not been answered. Theories give clues to how and why people commit criminal acts.
If one takes the penal code as an instrument for expressing the moral values and norms of society, interests of the criminal justice system have arguably increasingly been focused on the protection of society rather than the rehabilitation of the offender. Societies search for ways to support and empathise with victims, while morally condemning offenders for their acts, and the general feeling of justice tends to be satisfied only when strict sentences are distributed in serious criminal cases such as sex offenses and assaults. The penal code is seen as an instrument for expressing the moral values and norms of society, and protecting survivors through prosecution. Considering the above as important to society and therefore a survivor, the
Chicago has adopted several nicknames within the past few years. One of the most frequently used nicknames is Chi-Raq. Chicago was given the nickname because the city’s murder rates surpassed the death rates in Iraq within one year. Because of the large amount of publicity Chicago has received, even Spike Lee chose to produce a movie entitled “Chi-Raq”. Chicago has been deemed as a city with several shootings and killings.